A small black hole goes thru a toroidal hole.

[negativzero]

If a small round black hole is traveling normal to the center of the major plane of a larger toroidal black hole, is it possible any energy will "get thru" to the other side of the toroid?
.
It's said that once you wander into a BH, you can't get out. It's like a tar pit but worse. Maybe there's hope yet.
.
It seems like a few things could occur: The whole thing might collapse into a spherical hole. Or perhaps it's impossible to hit the center exactly, so the smaller hole will bleed off in one direction, and spiral-in due to frame drag. Or, some of the smaller hole could be pulled into the larger one in a disc and some of it might come thru the other side. Perhaps with enough velocity, it might get thru clean, but ringing like a bell. The small hole has spin too. That would shape the event.
.
Thx for your kind attention
-0

 

[Naty1]

What models a 'toroidal black hole'??

 

[Mordred]

Almost sounds like Poplowski's torsion model, but that's just a guess

 

[Mordred]

I was definitely wrong on that quess lol.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0004051v2.pdf

 

[negativzero]

The Poplowski article leaves me wondering what theory provides that electrons and positrons are sent in the same direction in the same magneticly induced jet? My naive expectation would be that they would be sent in opposite directions.
.
Some kind of helical wrap-around maybe? It's hard to imagine.
.
Re my original question, my instinct is that the faster the little black hole goes, the more mass/energy it contributes to the system. It can add more mass/energy via its kinetic energy than it contains in mass, and all this mass in a small place adds up to collapse of the whole shebang to a sphere . This, before any sizable mass/energy is ejected out the other side of the toriod, by amplifying the velocity.
.
Note, I'm not licensed to practice Cosmetology. i could enquire at the local beauty college, however.
-0

 

[P.Bo]

The Poplowski article leaves me wondering what theory provides that electrons and positrons are sent in the same direction in the same magneticly induced jet? My naive expectation would be that they would be sent in opposite directions.

Just shooting from my hip here, but why wouldn't electrons and positrons go in the same direction? The magnetic fields will just make them swirl around in opposite rotating directions, but still in the same trajectory/path.


As to your torodial black hole, I'm lost on that one. I would think that would leave a naked singularity which was a no-no.

 

[negativzero]

Thanks for responding Bo.
.
Yeah, Spivey sourced by Mordred kind of covered that. [i mistakenly identified the article as Poplowski's.]
Spivey wrote:
"...BHs of
spherical topology are not expected to retain significant electrical
charge. It is argued that tori exhibit a vital difference.
When a rotating torus accumulates charge, the circulating
current establishes a poloidal magnetic field. Lines of magnetic
flux encircle the torus but nowhere intersect its surface.
Nearby the surface, flux lines are orthogonal to the current
flow and parallel to the surface itself. Sufficiently intense
magnetic fields constrain the motion of accreting plasma,
obliging its constituent particles to follow helical trajectories
which wind about lines of flux..." The same should happen to particles in the jet.
.
Sounds kind of like a straw Chinese Finger Trap structure.
.
Still, it's hard to imagine why pair annihilation wouldn't exhaust electrons and positrons quickly as they cross paths. But he also says:
"...A particle traveling through the ergosphere might disintegrate
into two particles, one of which plunges headlong
towards the event horizon whilst the other emerges from the
ergosphere and escapes to ‘infinity’, e.g. as part of a jet. Energy
is extracted if the emergent particle fragment has more
energy than the originally intact particle, with the captured
fragment carrying negative energy into the BH. The Penrose
process efficiency improves if the particles have relativistic
incident velocities, particularly those opposing the BH’s rotation..."
So the pair annihilation can enhance the ultimate output, and increase the jet energy, by using up the spin momentum of the BH to send particles to infinity. That's the way i read it anyway.
.
-0

 

[Mordred]

Here is a more recent article I found on Tori magnetic fields

http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0601678v3.pdf

this article had it as a reference I was looking to see if toroidal was included

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1104.5499v3.pdf

the second one is a collection of formulas in regards to accretion disk/jets Wasn't able to find why they had the other article referenced but hats due to limitted time looking at the two

 

[negativzero]

Mordred,
i think i have most of the answer to my question:
Freidman's Topological Censorship theorem implies that a light ray cannot pass through the central toroidal hole before the topology becomes spherical. This seems to result from the non-trivial topology of the ring structure. The same would hold for a smaller BH, since a photon, being massless, would have the better chance of getting through. i'd expect a change in momentum of the system, or perhaps some stuff to get knocked out the other side, indirectly.
.
Inevitably, as far as i can tell, the torus will eventually use up it's spin by powering it's jet, and when the spin is slow enough, the thing is expected to collapse. Opinions exist that the topological transition from torus to sphere would be accompanied by a large energy release.
.
Accretion, can add spin. But the question i ask doesn't describe a usual scenario for accretion, since my massive object would be coming in perpendicular to the hole. i can't figure whether this might ultimately slow down the spin, but i'll guess yes, since i have no reputation to uphold.
.
As for mood: at the social level, mood explains why we tire of one fashion, and seem to need the new. But mood itself is unexplained. As Greenspan said [paraphrasing], at his peak he understood pretty much everything about Economics except fads. He called them "manias." Thus, economists too understand NOTHING!
.
Be not perturbed. Nobody knows nuthin', 'bout your wife or anyone else. The difference is, we don't get no Nobel Prizes! And don't worry about that dust up with King Arthur, peeps will forget all about it, surely.
-0

 

[negativzero]

But does anybody know anything about mini-toroidal black holes?
.
i don't want them to feel neglected.
.
i wonder what happens if you try to penetrate a mini-toroid with a mini-hole a millionth of a second before the mini-toroid evaporates entirely.
.
The masculine impulse in me needs to find a way to, to, ahhh, uhhh, you know, penetrate.
.
Regular normal every day black holes can't quite put as much as 25% of their energy into their total mass/energy via spin. Lots of energy in the spin. But, as far as i know there is no known limit yet on the amount of energy that TOROIDS can store in spin. This is why cops are stronger than they look, they eat the things!
.
i'm pretty sure that I'm begging the question here. You can look it up. It's beggary.
-0

 

[Chronos]

Your 'against the mainstream' ideas are shallow and wearing thin.

 

[negativzero]

Chronos my old friend it is you who swims 'gainst the main stream. The more refined question is this: "How close can two blacks holes get and still recede into infinity?" More people than myself it seems care about this issue.
.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/12_releases/press_060412.html
.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/news/H-12-182.html
.
http://www.space.com/16031-supermassive-black-hole-ejected-host-galaxy.html
.
This quote: “Einstein’s equations are so complicated that we were able to solve them accurately only a few years ago for a relatively simple system of two black holes in a bound orbit,” said co-author Avi Loeb from the Harvard Center for Astrophysics. “Such a system forms naturally as a result of a merger between two galaxies, each hosting a single black hole at its center. The exact solution to Einstein’s equations, obtained with sophisticated computer algorithms, shows that the two black holes merge into a single black hole which is kicked in a preferred direction like a rocket due to the directional emission of gravitational waves which serve as the substance coming out from the rocket exhaust.”
at: : http://www.universetoday.com/95628/are-rogue-black-holes-wandering-the-universe/#ixzz2bnLLuhe8
.
>>>>>SO! What i need to do is get the guys with the sophisticated algorithms to show me an extreme case of the littlest [ejected] black hole in the three-black-hole simulation. How close can it come to a bigger hole and still be ejected to infinity?
.
Great tunneling black holes! Sorta. This abstract is not strictly on topic but it's cute.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.4458
.
Hope springs eternal in the Northstate...
Except in your heart Chronos. If you don't like this thread perhaps you shouldn't participate.

-0

 

[Chronos]

Your references are all based on the same study about an alleged supermassive black hole 'kick'. How exactly do you define a 'mini-toroidal' black hole?

 

[negativzero]

The last article is about, NGC 1277 AND NGC 1275
---two galaxies in the Perseus cluster.
.
The first 4 articles are slightly different renditions regarding the CID-41 system,thought to include a quasar
(also known as CXOC J100043.1+020637[4]) ---It is a different example in Sextans.
.
In answer to your question re a "mini-toroid," i would assume it would be about as small as a toroid could get and remain stable. i expect the rules for evaporation of toroidal might be different than for spherical holes. If i bump into Kip Thorne maybe i will remember to ask him. At any rate, a mini would definitely be smaller than "Family size."
.
But forget about that for a minute. You're the expert here on GR Chronos, at least relative to me: if gravity waves are dense enuf, can they form a black hole; and if so, will their contribution to BH charge be zero, since gravitons have zero charge; and what if any would be the resultant effect of the reputed spin 2 of gravitons on the nature of the BH? Could a BH formed solely by gravitons spin at all? i don't see why not.
.
The two distinct examples in the articles above assumed large black holes were ejected from their home galaxies, and both were explained as resulting from extremely dense gravity waves. In situations where billions of solar masses are involved, the gravity waves produced in mergers are big enough to sling large black holes out of their homes. i'd think that might add up to sufficient mass/energy for a BH, but getting it condensed enough looks less likely. What would it be like to be on a space station in the path of such intense gravity waves?
.
Mergers are interesting, but I'm also curious about near misses. Failures to merge followed by recession to infinity. If you spot any articles on or near the topic please relate them.
.
-0

 

[negativzero]

ok Chronos, you are so smart. Type something. Something that someone else didn't say, and it's not about me.
Go!

 

[Drakkith]

ok Chronos, you are so smart. Type something. Something that someone else didn't say, and it's not about me.
Go!

What does this even mean?

 

[negativzero]

Black holes are kohl! i'd wager a penny that 99% of the patrons on this message bd agree with me.
.
i'm curious about what happens when black holes NEARLY collide. To find out, i ask. i search. And i found some stuff that looked interesting given my curiosity. And Mr. Chronos declares that i am shallow.
.
That's what it means.
-0

 

[Drakkith]

Black holes are kohl! i'd wager a penny that 99% of the patrons on this message bd agree with me.
.
i'm curious about what happens when black holes NEARLY collide. To find out, i ask. i search. And i found some stuff that looked interesting given my curiosity. And Mr. Chronos declares that i am shallow.
.
That's what it means.
-0

You're asking about a black hole passing through a toroidal black hole? I'm not sure anyone here is going to be able to answer that.

 

[negativzero]

Thanks for your response Drakkith,
perhaps you noticed above:
"...Freidman's Topological Censorship theorem implies that a light ray cannot pass through the central toroidal hole before the topology becomes spherical. This seems to result from the non-trivial topology of the ring structure..."
.
i previously thought that this pretty much settled my question, since i had envisioned a smallish diameter BH trying to pass thru a largish diameter toroid. It seemed to me that a photon had a much better chance of penetrating the toroid than a black hole. But when i read that gravity waves were knocked out one side in collisions of supermassive black holes, it kind of re-opened my inquiry. Not to mention the idea of supper massive black holes themselves being knocked out of galaxies. So something DOES come out the other side in collisions, but just what kinds of stuff? Presumably, according to current fashion, gravitons are just virtual particles. But here they are, at least close to the event of collision, very densely inhabiting the space near the collision. Here i go again but i have to wonder if gravitons could be so dense that they could create a BH. Now THAT is a question i doubt anyone can answer with surety.
.
For me, the articles i mentioned were wow moments. If no one else shares my enthusiasm then that's nothing new.
.
Thx again for your time and attention. And i guess I'm sorry if i offended Mr. Chronos. Especially if he's not going to talk to me anymore. i'd rather be beaten than ignored, Chrony.
-0

 

[Drakkith]

Thx again for your time and attention. And i guess I'm sorry if i offended Mr. Chronos. Especially if he's not going to talk to me anymore. i'd rather be beaten than ignored, Chrony.
-0

Please, there is no need for personal attacks on forum members, no matter what they may have said.

But here they are, at least close to the event of collision, very densely inhabiting the space near the collision. Here i go again but i have to wonder if gravitons could be so dense that they could create a BH. Now THAT is a question i doubt anyone can answer with surety.

Not sure. I'd expect you would need a phenomenal amount of energy carried by a gravitational wave with a minuscule wavelength. But since gravitational waves are in the metric itself, I don't know how that would work.

 

[negativzero]

Drakkith: "...since gravitational waves are in the metric itself, I don't know how that would work. "
.
i've been making a list of forms of energy and asking myself the absurd question: "Can a black hole be constructed purely out of this particle?" The next question of course is, "Are there any examples anywhere of this happening or almost happening?"
.
The list is long. For neutrons and protons and even photons the answer is easy, but for quarks and gluons, the question isn't physically grammatical, if those particles can't be isolated in the first place. For W and Z bosons with such short half-lifes, purity could only be partial, and since they are force carriers, where would they be carrying the force to in a field populated only by W or Z particles? Again the question seems to fail to make sense. i had previously thought that i could add gravitons to the list of items which don't or can't collapse into a BH. But, it's a brain teaser because you can look at gravity as just bent space caused by mass/energy. In that case, gravity is just a feature of space/time. Or, you can look for the particle which carries the force, gravity. The hard part is figuring out when to look at the particle, the graviton, and when to look at the general relativity. Gravity waves can "radiate." But gravitons are not particles radiated by massive objects. Presumably gravity waves are potentially rich in gravitons but the waves propagate not the gravitons.
.
So, i too don't know. Moreover, I'm not sure my question makes sense for every form of energy.
.
This is what happens when people make crazy lists and ask themselves inappropriate questions that no one should care about.
-0

 

[Drakkith]

Well, currently you CAN'T look for the particle. Gravitons have never been detected or shown to exist.

 

[negativzero]

i know! What's been bothering me for the last 40 years is what happens if no graviton is EVER detected?
.
i'll go one step further. i predict no graviton will be detected.
.
Perhaps physics will take a step back eventually, and count gravity as a feature of empty space, in the same sense that the Casimir effect is, or dark energy, or the alignment of positronium around electrons when peeps try to measure the features of the electron. Or Thorne's version of the Casimir effect at the event horizon in BHs, which kind of mimics Hawking radiation. There may ultimately be no need for the "4th force."
.
And since i have absolutely no reputation to uphold or defend, i'll scream it...i DON"T BELIEVE IN GRAVITONS.
.
That doesn't distinguish gravitons or me, i don't believe in much.
-0

 

[Chronos]

Apologies, Mr. negativzero, no offense taken or intended. It is unlikely gravitons will ever be detected. As virtual particles, they only appear in equations [re:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle] . I was snippy earlier because I felt you were drifting into ATM territory.

 

[negativzero]

Hey Chronos! "It is unlikely gravitons will ever be detected..."
.
i met this guy once who claimed peeps didn't dream because HE didn't. This whole thing with gravitons reminds me of him.
.
It's a hard topic to opinionate on. After all, it was Einstein who dreamed them up. As always, i appreciate your input. That's why i come to the message board...to find folks who think they are smarter than me. But now that you have mentioned ATM, i will find out what it is about and i might just fixate on it. Sorry, i can't help it. Call me a thingy but i can't stop being curious.
All yer commerts R welcome.
-0

 

[negativzero]

okay got it! Atmospheric Physics?...no... i guess not. ATM machines that vomit 20 dollar bills...nope.
Give me a hint will you? And then i can slap my head and say, " Wow! i knew that!"
-0

 

[Drakkith]

Einstein didn't come up with the idea of the graviton. That would be the folks who worked on the first quantum field theories and the like.

 

[Chronos]

ATM = against the mainstream on PF. I think I was right the first time. You really are just looking to butt heads with people who think they are smarter than you. I admit you outsmarted me on that one. Offense taken, and intended this time.

 

[negativzero]

Drakkith: "...That would be the folks who worked on the first quantum field theories..."
.
You're blaming Hilbert?
.
Chronos, I'm just trying to find anyone who will talk to me. Your down to terra approach is greatly appreciated.
And I'm pretty sure that you are smarter...even though i have a 106 IQ. Or i did at one time. And that's pretty high in this neck O' th' woods.
-0

 

[DennisN]

You're blaming Hilbert?

I don't know who exactly started with the ideas, but there seems to be quite many who have/had thought about quantum gravity early from the 1930s-, see Notes for a brief history of quantum gravity (Carlo Rovelli, arXiv:gr-qc/0006061).

 

[negativzero]

Thx, Denny! i will read this. Smolin thinks Rovelli is tops. And Lee Smolin just replaced Wheeler as my formost fav cosmologist. Mostly it's because he makes me think. Like listening to talk radio hosts that you never agree with, but without the anger.
-0

 

[Drakkith]

You're blaming Hilbert?

Blaming? That's an interesting choice of words...

Chronos, I'm just trying to find anyone who will talk to me. Your down to terra approach is greatly appreciated.
And I'm pretty sure that you are smarter...even though i have a 106 IQ. Or i did at one time. And that's pretty high in this neck O' th' woods.
-0

If you're looking for people to talk to, I'd advise against throwing an IQ number around. It's pretty meaningless.

 

[negativzero]

"Blaming?" Okay, crediting. Excuse my sense of humor please. And the 105ish IQ? That's actually my best friend's joke. i admit i stole from him, and i would name him except i assume he doesn't want to be included.
.
i look to veteran posters to give me guidance in this new environment.
.
And i did read the article and made some comments which were lost in the cloud. Big loss! My humor again...i hope that humor is okay if i can find anyone who shares my sense of it. If humor is not okay i would like to know this as soon as possible.
.
-0

 

[negativzero]

not a friendly space here ...bye

 

[Drakkith]

not a friendly space here ...bye

Statements like this are the reason you're not receiving the warmest of welcomes.